Firearm safety has been an issue almost as long as firearms have existed. In fact, the more ubiquitous firearms have become, the greater the need has been to balance the rights of the firearm owner with public safety concerns. There are many firearm casualties that could have been prevented if the gun owner utilized some sort of safety device. By way of example, common instances that could have been prevented are: (1) children finding a loaded firearm and accidentally discharging the weapon; (2) an intruder discovering a weapon and using it against the gun owner; (3) an altercation that results in the gun owner losing control of the firearm; or (4) suicide committed by someone other than the gun owner.
Irrespective of which side of the gun debate an individual is on, generally most people support the development of devices that prevent unauthorized use of firearms. Over the years, gun owners have used locks and safes as a means of ensuring that their guns will not accidentally be used by young children for example. See e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 3,512,290 and a more modern version at U.S. Pat. No. 7,908,779, the entire contents of both are hereby incorporated by reference.
In addition, there are electronic locks, such as pin code readers or motion detectors that have been employed as a firearm safety mechanism. See e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,459,957 (pin code) and U.S. Pat. No. 7,096,619 (motion detection), the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. While these electronic locks eliminate the need to find a key and unlock a mechanical lock, they can be equally impractical in an emergency situation where it may be dark and the user may be under duress because he or she may be in imminent danger.
The above-described safety mechanisms, therefore, suffer from the time lag required for the gun owner to access his/her gun in the event an intruder enters his/her home. To address this shortcoming, innovators have developed a number of alternative electromechanical solutions to the gun safety issue. For example, some firearm safety devices employ biometric authentication, such as a fingerprint authorization, voice recognition, DNA recognition, and optical recognition before becoming operational. See U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,850, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. Although each of these biometric data are a fairly reliable means of identifying an individual, the authentication process is implemented in hardware and software. There is a direct correlation between the accuracy of these recognition devices and the cost and sophistication of the hardware and software. For most civilian applications, the hardware/software available to use biometric detection as a means of authentication will inherently have a certain percent of false positive or false negative readings. False positive and false negative authentications for a firearm safety device can have deadly consequences for the user.
Another solution to the spontaneity impediments of locks and safes is the use of transponders, radio frequency identification (“RFID”) and other electronic authorization means within a wearable, such as a ring or a watch, paired with a particular firearm. When the wearable is within close proximity to the firearm, the firearm can be fired. The corollary being, when the wearable is out of range of the firearm, the firearm is disabled. See e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 8,549,780, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. While this is an improvement over the false positives and false negatives that are inherent in biometric detection, there is nonetheless a risk that the user would not be wearing his/her watch at the exact moment when he/she needed to use the firearm.
Alternative approaches to firearm safety have included the concept of disabling the firearm if it is within a certain range of a particular type of public building, for example a school, airport, or church. U.S. Pat. No. 8,966,797, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference, for example discloses the idea of using GPS tracking to determine if the firearm is within a certain range of a protected building or space. When the firearm comes within that range, it is automatically disabled. The GPS tracking capability is enabled by a phone communicatively coupled to the firearm, or internally within the firearm in additional embodiments.
This patent proposes potentially valuable public safety technology. It provides an easy, reliable means for ensuring that the proper owner of the firearm, and any additionally authorized users, are the only individuals who can operate a specific firearm. The issues related to firearm safety have become so prevalent in modern society, even law enforcement agencies are discussing the need to provide additional safety measures in guns used by law enforcement personnel. Specifically, the National Institute of Justice recently released a set of guidelines entitled “Draft Baseline Specifications for Law Enforcement Service Pistols with Security Technology” for public comments, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. See http://nij.gov/Documents/draft-baseline-specifications-for-law-enforcement-service-pistols-with-security-technology.pdf. Of note, these guidelines call for integrating smart gun technology into a firearm's design without compromising the reliability, durability, and accuracy officer's expect from their weapons.
There is thus a need in the firearm safety industry for a means of ensuring that there is a one-to-one or one-to-few pairing of a gun with an authorized user or users.